To think a lot of people who agree with VAT on school fees…

[geeenuoe]

Actually don’t truly understand that to most sending their kids to these schools, it is a massive, massive struggle already.

There seems to be a mentality that if you can afford 20k a year then you’re already comfortable so sod it, you should find more cash now for vat … but do people in general not understand that some families re mortgage their homes to pay these fees? Yes there’s mega wealthy people but there’s many, many more who are not.

On the one hand we hear a good education is a luxury so VAT must be applied, then on the other we are told a good education is a right for all. So… why are we taking away that good education from those who already have it? Why is the focus not on sorting out the state sector properly? We all know the vat won’t fix the state sector. It may help in a tiny way in ad hoc circumstances but there’s so so so much more that needs to be done to state schools to make them ever match what the private sector offers.

I simply don’t get this mentality that those making sacrifices must make more when it comes to bloody education. I say this as someone who can’t afford the fees but if I could I absolutely would… and I also acknowledge that I am unwilling to go to some lengths that others will to pay it. I respect the choice of others to make such sacrifices and have no desire to make it harder and more inaccessible for the masses to access it. Similarly, I know plenty of people driving fancy cars and spending loads on holidays… they’ve chosen that over school fees. And those who have spend loads getting into a postcode of a decent state school… should they be paying enhanced tax on their house purchase?

Why do most people think those who pay schools fees are doing so with great ease? Is it basically because they don’t personally know people paying this so accept the media narrative that it’s the mega rich only?

Because it's not fair on the families who can't afford it. There should be no such thing as private schools. The playing field should be level for everyone.

I can’t honestly feel any sympathy for people making the conscious choice to spend money on holidays and bigger houses on private education, the vast majority of people don’t have expensive holidays or big houses in the first place.

Why on earth would Bridget Phillipson be jealous? She was brought up by a single mother in a council house on free school meals and was still able to get to Oxford.

Why do you assume that people who disagree with private education are just jealous?

You are arguing this appallingly. Trying to argue that the vast majority of people who pay for private school are average is nonsense. Saying things like 'only a couple of holidays a year' just smacks people in the face who can't afford any holidays. There are far far more of them. If you want to argue it, you could say this does not hit very rich people. The new legislation hits upper middle incomes. So those who can only just afford it no longer can therefore widening the gap between the mega rich and everyone else, not making it better. But the way you are arguing it's hard to feel sorry!

@anxioussister No one is demonising you by expecting you to pay taxes. Hopefully that helps you to feel less anxious.

Most people fully understand OP (not least because of the multiple threads every day), but many - including myself - still agree with the VAT.

I’m a school governor at a state school. I’m amazed by the number of threads compared to any (?) on improving state education which constitutes ‘93%’ of pupils.

It’s not going to change anything.

The number of children leaving the private sector due to it has already cancelled out any potential benefits, but these wouldn’t have happened in any case; no state schools will improve as a result of this policy. And parents who have to move into state schools will not speak up to improve state schools; they’ll pay for tutors which are far cheaper than fees.

That's daft though. My two dds and many others got top grades at state comp. Top.uni offers.
So they had no need to.go private.
Maybe your kids have no need of private

Rich people problems.

The average joe can't pull the equivalent Of a 3rd salary out their ass to send their kids to private school.

It's a very very privileged position to be in.

Most are making ends meet without a couple of holidays.

Very entitled post from someone very affluent.

This

People who don't engage with a system tend not to care about the system. If you have no choice but to send your child to a state option then, with 'skin in the game' you're going to do your damndest to try to make it the best it can be.

Don't want state but a non compulsory alternative that you perceive to be better? You pay VAT like you would on a building project or washing machine.

100% agree! Would vote for a gov that would abolish them!

the least the parents can do is pay the VAT 👍🏻

and not whine about it 👍🏻

I have heard a lot of posters over the last few months bragging how they could afford indie education but they choose not to. Good for them.

However, imagine if they did put their kids through indie, wouldn’t that be alleviating the burden on state ed? Bunging a few hundred quid (at the very max) at the school once a year does not actually do much at all for state ed.

Maybe, everyone should pay for education? Maybe it shouldn’t be free? (Means tested like the WFA naturally).

When I taught in state ed (for a long while) I remember thinking some parents would care more about their kids’ behaviour and effort if they were paying. Now I do work in indie ed and I see that it’s true. Parents ARE more involved. Obviously many parents in state ed were involved but funnily enough, the kids who caused the most trouble seldom had parents who supported the school. So there’s the answer for state ed, if parents can afford it, they should pay for their child’s state ed.

It polls well because people like taxes that others have to pay.

Q1. Do you want other people to pay more to fund your child’s education for you with no risk of you having to spend an additional £1 yourself?

Hardly a shock that people thought that was a great idea. It doesn’t make it right though.

But that's not how tax works is it? I send my children to state school, but have never used an ambulance or called the fire brigade or the police. I also work when we as a family could afford for me not too.Therefore while I cost the tax payer more in education than some, I cost far less in NHS and other costs. Does that count??
And doesn't your argument also hold for high earners without children? Or with adult children?

Shes not being sacked for the popularity or unpopularity of the scheme. Shes being sacked because the legislation will include universities, swimming schools, nurseries etc. Not just the idealogical targets of the children in private schools. Its an ill thought through rush job despite being one of Labour's flagship money raising schemes. I suppose if you are targeting one type of child's education you have to expect some collateral damage from all the other affected children/young adults. No child is more important than another after all. Equality remember. Why should kids privileged enough to have swimming lessons get off scot free.

I disagree. In my experience State schools have responded incredibly quickly with any demands about negative behaviour.

People who don't engage with a system tend not to care about the system. If you have no choice but to send your child to a state option then, with 'skin in the game' you're going to do your damndest to try to make it the best it can be.

My DC are in private school. If I had to send them to state school, I would pay for a tutor to tutor them personally, I wouldn't be trying to improve a school (how are you supposed to do this in any case?)

that's not my job. That's the school's job

Yes I agree. DS has just started (age 10) and we're stretching ourselves to do it. A lot. But so far so good, the difference in him in just 6 weeks is mind-blowing. We're unique in our friend group and would say that many of them can afford school fees but choose not to. Absolutely fine. But since he started there have been some snide comments like 'well you can afford it' when anything involving money comes up. The fact we now have a lot less money because we're paying school fees is lost on everyone. I really hope my DC have better critical thinking skills when they're older.

Nobody who is not on a very good salary can send their children to private school. We can talk about their deprivations, struggles ,scraping by with older cars and taking only one holday a year. Huge sacrifices apparently.
The simple facts are that many of us live like that anyway ,so no we are not falling over ourselves to feel sorry for people who can afford these fees and still live an ordinary life.

This is where I just lose patience with the argument and think fine, tax away.

The minute someone implies that privately educating their dc means they just care more about said dc & their education than someone using state schools, or talks about all the sacrifices they are making like only having two holidays a year, they are showing how very out of touch they are with the actual reality most people are living with. And rather than seeking to understand, just want to whine about how very unfair it is.

Why not talk to your school? They could always choose to make changes to their budgets and not pass the whole rise on. State schools are functioning on a fraction of the funding…it is possible.

@Changingplace no, I don’t, because I also want her to be in a home that is secure. I hope that we can send her for secondary but I personally wouldn’t re mortgage for it.

Well, if they can no longer afford private school because of the vat then they can transfer their kids to state school and choose to support the state school their child is at. I'm sure there's plenty they can help with that would improve things.

Growing up, I had parents who could afford to send me to private school, but my father vehemently objected in principle as he's European.

He said that in Europe hardly anyone sends their children to private school and countries just invested a lot more in state education.

I have no sympathy OP...

That’s simply not true or indeed legal. Have a look at the average schools financial filings and you’ll see there is no profit.

They are charities and therefore have no beneficiaries and no UBO taking money out of the system. All money is used for education.

70% of their costs are salaries. Cost savings will be via redundancies and removal of bursaries.

@SophiaJ8 yes please explain why Bridge is well jel! 🤣🤣

the playing field is becoming more equal and you all can’t stand it! Absolutely hilarious!